Presidential Debate II
October 16, 1996
Debate Score Card
Prepared by Ron Faucheux, Editor and Publisher
(See the Campaigns & Elections
"Debate Watcher's Guide"
for details).
Follow-up questions, please call
202-638-7788 (day) or
202-298-6665 (evening)
FINAL SCORE: CLINTON 75, DOLE 74
Dole looked good and did better
than expected handling the town hall
format. He seemed to have learned
from George Bush's mistakes
in 1992. He was aggressive and
didn't miss many opportunities.
Clinton expressed his basic
messages with clarity. He
artfully used facts and figures
to illustrate accomplishments.
Because of voter doubt that
Clinton is honest, he's wise never
to say "trust me" -- but instead
to say, "don't take my word
for this" -- and then to use
statistics to make the point.
Clinton's statement about
"no attack has ever....and no
insult has ever...." was well
done, an attempt to exploit
public distaste for negative
politics.
EACH CANDIDATE BEGINS WITH 50 POINTS.
CLINTON +50, DOLE +50
Part A -- Add Points
1. Did candidate meet or exceed expectations?
CLINTON +3, DOLE +9
Dole did much better handling
the town hall format than
he was expected to do. He was
aggressive without looking
nasty or mean, though was
clearly being negative.
2. Did candidate accomplish what he needed to do?
CLINTON +9, DOLE +5
Dole needed to (a) score big
to change the dynamic
of the election and (b) to
show he could relate to average
people. He did some of that,
but didn't land any knock-out
punches.
Clinton needed to (a) avoid
mistakes, (b) reinforce his
basic message, (c) effectively
deflect attacks while connecting
with average people. He did
that.
Dole made a major pitch for
California, which apparently
has become the key to his
electoral vote strategy. His
expression of support for the
CCRI was part of that strategy.
At some points, it almost
seemed like both candidates
were running for Governor of
California instead of President.
Clinton's message about the
state's economy being better
now than four years ago helped
reverse some of Dole's efforts
that were targeted to the nation's
largest state.
3. Did candidate control agenda and remain on the offense?
CLINTON +2, DOLE +5
Dole raised the issue of trust
and ethics from the first question
on. Clinton seemed personally
hurt by Dole's remarks, but he
did not rebut them -- he refused
to take the bait.
Dole raised a number of strong
points on ethics but did not
fully drive them home.
The format made it difficult for
any candidate to control
the agenda.
4. Did candidate get the better of the opposition in key exchanges or
confrontations?
CLINTON +5, DOLE +5
Dole provoked the first conflict
with his comments on Medicare
and Medicaid. Clinton didn't
have adequate time to answer.
Dole handled Medicare and Social
Security issues well, though
Clinton responded effectively
by taking Dole's reference to
his "ideas" and turning it
against him.
Dole scored a good line about
Clinton's tax cuts expiring
in 2000. Clinton's "I'll
tell you how we'll pay for it"
was helpful but did not erase
the impact of the Dole hit.
Dole hit Clinton hard on
promising a tax cut and not
delivering and seemed to put
Clinton on the defensive.
Dole's negativity and Clinton's
ability to rise above attacks
was a factor.
5. Did the candidate answer questions effectively?
CLINTON +7, DOLE +5
Dole handled the defense
issue well. Clinton's "Commander
in Chief" response was effective.
Dole's rebuttal was strong.
Dole gave a good answer to the
tobacco question. Clinton came
back strong; Dole's rebuttal
was aggressive.
On the age issue, Dole didn't
do quite as well as he needed
to on this critical point.
Dole's crack about falling off
the platform and getting a call
from a trial lawyer was effective.
SUBTOTAL OF ADDED POINTS:
CLINTON +76, DOLE +79
Part B -- Deduct Points
Candidate Appearance:(May deduct up to 5 points)
Both candidates looked good.
Hair & Grooming
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
Tired & worn
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
Clothing inappropriate, sloppy
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
Make-up not well done
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
Poor posture
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
Unpleasant, distracting facial expressions
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
Tone: (May deduct up to 5 points)
Too negative, nasty
CLINTON -0, DOLE -3
While Dole was aggressive and
often effective, his negativity
did him some harm.
Weak, uncertain
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
Humorless, too intense
CLINTON -1, DOLE -0
Obnoxious, arrogant, ornery
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
Speaking Style:
(May deduct up to 5 points)
Garbled, confused expression of ideas
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
Incomplete, fragmented statements
CLINTON -0, DOLE -1
Dole occasionally lost
the power of his points
because of a lack of
clarity and incomplete
statements.
Inability to stay within time limit
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
Poor eye contact
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
Speaking too fast,too slow
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
Too automated, canned
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
Too loud, too low
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
Lack of animation
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
Low energy level
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
Monotonous, no inflection
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
General Matters: (May deduct up to 5 points)
Unprepared, lack of knowledge
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
Nervousness
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
Ineffective opening
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
Dole did very well with his opening,
far better than the first debate.
He failed, though, to draw the
hard contrasts or to take control
of the agenda. Clinton seemed to
be relieved about that. Clinton
did well defining his basic
message -- a familiar refrain.
Ineffective closing
CLINTON -0, DOLE -1
Clinton gave a better closing.
Lack of alertness
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
Stiff and wooden
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
Disorganized presentation
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
Other:
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
Major Blunders: (May deduct up to 10 points)
Serious gaffe, embarrassing misstatement, or erroneous declaration
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
Loss of cool, unpleasant display of anger or irritation
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
Poor handling of an exchange with opponent or questioner
CLINTON -0, DOLE -0
TOTAL POINT DEDUCTIONS (Part B)
CLINTON -1, DOLE -5
FINAL SCORE:
BILL CLINTON 75
BOB DOLE 74